You know, I’m a charitable guy. I try to apply the credo of this site everywhere I can (note: it says “adequately”, not “feasibly”), and I generally prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt. I’m hitting my limit with this “Creation Museum” nonsense. I’m convinced this is a joke. A giant prank on the faithful.
The Creation Museum, for those unfamiliar, isn’t really a “museum” so much as it is a “Bible-based diorama.” Most museums are made by collecting archaeological evidence, or physical relics of some kind in the case of science or cultural, and then putting them on display. Exceptions are made in the case of many skeletal remains, as scientists get as much as they can and then extrapolate what the rest would look like to the best of their knowledge. In the case of something like the brontosaurus, they make a mistake but acknowledge it and fix it.
In a way, the CM is kind of a museum in reverse. Instead of collecting physical evidence and then displaying their findings, they take the conclusions and construct “evidence”. The vast majority of the displays are basically sculptures that interpret events as they would have happened according to God’s word.
Here’s a great photo gallery of someone’s visit. Let’s pick out a few choice cuts. Warning, you may become dumber simply by viewing these.
Out of the dozens of pictures this guy took, it’s almost impossible to be out the worst offenders, so in the interest of brevity I chose examples of the prevailing attitudes amongst the majority of the museum.

Right off the bat we get a primer for what’s to come. We know that their “methodology” is to assume that the Bible is right and then go from there. All four sentences are lies. The book is incredibly self-contradictory, the 2nd can’t be true since all translations differ, the 3rd is idiotic, and the 4th is crap because Biblical “prophecies” are only “proven true” ex post facto.
That “ex post facto” business seems to be how the Creation Museum works. As I scoped the photos, one thing became clear. The answer to everything, absolutely everything, was “well it had to have happened like that because The Bible says so.” Answers don’t involve evidence, but rationalization. Repeated, and increasingly painful, rationalization.

Proof in the pudding, as they say. Notice how nothing of this involves real evidence, just sitting around constructing ways to rationalize a Biblical passage with something we found. It’s sort of like if your buddy tells you he built a house by himself and you find Chinese notes scribbled on some of the doorframes, and then assume that it means your buddy knows Chinese but never told you.
Naturally, dinosaurs are prominent in the “museum” since they prove kind of a difficult topic for Bible Beaters. All evidence says dinosaurs went extinct long before people showed up (if for no reason other than prior to our finding their remains there’s no record of them), but obviously that doesn’t mesh. So there are completely hilarious sculptures of people with dinosaurs and explanations for how they got on the ark.
Yes, there were dinosaurs on the ark, didn’t you know? According to the CM, they were actually quite small, the size of a pony. More than that, they were all vegetarians prior to Adam’s sin! In fact, everything ate plants, there was no such thing as a carnivore six thousand years ago (being that that’s how old Earth is). Somehow, over the course of a few thousand years, a phenomenally complex hierarchy amongst the animal kingdom.
Nevermind that there are theories that humans aren’t conditioned to drink milk beyond infancy despite taking a whack at it for a few hundred years, apparently it’s possible not only for animals to instantly go from eating plants to eating each other, but they can set up a food-chain for convenience, all in a few millenia.
Things come to a head when this doozy of an “answer” pops up.

Every so often I am hit by something so incredibly stupid that I quite literally am rendered speechless. When I saw this photograph, I stared at it for a good 30 to 40 seconds before being capable of thinking in words. Look at it again. Take a moment. Let it sink in.
They are defending the viewpoint that dinosaurs lived with humans…
…which is only because the Bible says they had to…
…by bringing up dragons.
They invoke a creature of which there is no evidence, in order to explain how a creature of which there is a lot of evidence, got into a situation of which there is no evidence.
I’m not sure I can properly explain just how moronic this is, but I’ll try anyway. Imagine if someone asked you how you can be so sure that God talks to people, and your response is that movies like “Oh God!” starring John Denver are so common that we know they must be true.
This is why, to return to my initial premise, I’m convinced this is all a joke. A gigantic parody that’s meant to exploit the easily deluded and attract those who would mock them, and take money from both parties. From saying that there was no disease prior to Adam’s sin, to claiming dinosaurs all ate plants and somehow turned into dragons after the flood, there is no way that anyone could actually believe this.
It’s a mockery, a spoof, satire. It’s the Landover Baptist website turned three-dimensional. Someone please, please tell me this isn’t for real.





42 responses so far ↓
Jadrie // November 13, 2007 at 5:00 pm |
Whatever helps you sleep at night, Pal.
Rechan // November 13, 2007 at 5:50 pm |
Hanlon, there’s [url=http://www.csicop.org/si/2004-11/hovind.html]Dinosaur Adventure Park[/url], a Creationist dinosaur theme park.
The creationist musem is no joke.
PaulM // November 13, 2007 at 6:27 pm |
I hate to be the one to break it to ya, buddy: They’re dead serious.
You knew it in your heart, didn’t you?
What’s scary is that there are people who’s minds are changed by touring this “museum.” They come out even more convinced of Biblical truth than they were when they went in.
Those folk, IMHO, are every bit as dangerous to this society as Osama bin Laden.
arg // November 13, 2007 at 8:25 pm |
I believe it hanlon. So, is evolution a fact? Did we come from nothing? Is radiocarbon dating right? Why does the “tree of evolution” so skewed? Is there any such thing as logical absolutes? Is life able to create itself without set intelligence? Did we evolve from apes, and why haven’t they? What about the fossil record and the flaws in that? What about evidence for a young age? Probabilities of life? Probablities of earth being created? Why haven’t we found ANY life on any other planet? What about “supernatural events”? What about the complete disappearance of diseases in patients (i.e. cancer)? What about ghosts? I could go on an on Hanlon, and you could do the same to me. Is there a right/wrong way? Well, as an atheist you shouldn’t believe it. You know, morals and all. If I feel this is right, why don’t you just accept that it is right for me and wrong for you (even though i don’t think it is for you).
I have a challenge for you Hanlon. Read the Bible(i know you’ve stated you have). Read it and really try to challenge it. Don’t just take what you know because it’s what everyone told you, study what these creationists say as much as evolutionists say.
It sounds ridiculous to you know, but I pray that someday it will not. I can extrapolate things from a museum and make it look stupid too. Be fair, please.
Lando // October 4, 2009 at 7:11 am |
Hey Arg I just had to pop in a quick comment about your evolution questions. First of all yes evolution is proven its just the mechanics or how things evolve is kinda indispute so to say. In addition many poeple like you dont fully understand the concept of evolution. Apes and homo sapiens or human beings are distant cousins which means we share a common ancestor.
Hanlon // November 13, 2007 at 9:49 pm |
“I believe it hanlon. So, is evolution a fact? Did we come from nothing?”
Evolution is not abiogenesis. Evolution is a path from our beginning state to our current one, not an explanation for how life sprung up from nothing.
“Read it and really try to challenge it.”
Are you going to allow me to take it as written or are you going to start playing “that part’s allegorical”? If we get literal, then I’ve got a whole litany, from differing creation stories, two separate decalogues, no agreement on when Jesus was arrested (before or after the Passover), Christ’s last words…
I don’t need to challenge the Bible because it disagrees with itself. Let alone if I went after things like a passage where God made the sun move backwards 10 degrees in the sky.
N // November 13, 2007 at 9:50 pm |
“So, is evolution a fact? Did we come from nothing?”
Irrelevant. Evolution does not address the issue of the creation of life, only how it develops and changes over time.
“Is radiocarbon dating right?”
Yes, unless you can find a flaw in the process.
“Why does the “tree of evolution” so skewed?”
Explain?
“Is there any such thing as logical absolutes?”
Irrelevant. That’s a philosophical question.
“Is life able to create itself without set intelligence?”
See above.
“Did we evolve from apes, and why haven’t they? ”
Part 1: No. Apes and humans share a common ancestor.
Part 2: What?
“What about the fossil record and the flaws in that?”
Unless you want to provide something more specific, it sounds like you’re just trying to FUD evolution and geology.
“What about evidence for a young age?”
No evidence has been found that supports a “young earth” in the eyes of the scientific community. Ask a geologist and he will laugh in your face.
“Probabilities of life? Probablities of earth being created?”
Irrelevant.
“Why haven’t we found ANY life on any other planet?”
Because we haven’t actually set foot on other planets, our current view of the universe is still limited and growing, and the possibility of a planet developing that could sustain life similar to life on Earth is, if you pardon the obvious descriptor, astronomical.
“What about “supernatural events”?”
Irrelevant.
“What about the complete disappearance of diseases in patients (i.e. cancer)?”
Remission’s a great thing. However, studies have been conducted that show that (because I think this is what you’re getting at) prayer does not affect sick patients beyond providing mental support.
…
“Is there a right/wrong way? Well, as an atheist you shouldn’t believe it. You know, morals and all.”
Absolutely and utterly wrong. Morals, ethics, and guidelines defining right and wrong are not the exclusive purveyance of religion. Look up secular humanism, or any of the myriad philosophers who have written on the subject of morality and religion.
“If I feel this is right, why don’t you just accept that it is right for me and wrong for you (even though i don’t think it is for you).”
Because this is about science, not faith. Be as faithful as you want, but trying to push your faith, your scientifically unsupported worldview into the world of science is disingenuous, foolish, and just plain wrong.
Also, “evolutionist” isn’t a word. It’s one of those cute little sideways insults, like using Democrat as an adjective. Someone who believes in evolution does not base their entire life around evolution anymore than someone who believes in heat transfer bases their entire life around thermodynamics.
arg // November 13, 2007 at 10:50 pm |
I’m glad N gave me such great information on so many of my questions ( i really didn’t expect nor want them answered, because i could attempt to discuss them all with you). But at this point, your presuppositions will not allow me to say anything “valid”, so I will not.
Hanlon, I ask you. Did you read the Bible and figure these out, or did you go to some other source to find this out. No offense, but I find it hard to believe that you went through it yourself. I don’t see any problems with the things you’ve stated in the bible, they aren’t contradictions if you read them in context and understand what’s going on.
By the way, my bad with the evolution statement. I could’ve used a different word, I just didn’t really feel like explaining myself. Once again, my bad.
Also, N, please don’t tell me I’m foolish. I at one point thought this stuff was ridiculous too(not to the same extent as you) but i really didn’t believe in young earth creationism. It wasn’t until I researched it for myself (not just accept what others say as truth) until i came to my logical conclusion that it is correct.
You know what, Christianity would be so easy if I could just show you what it feels like to become a Christian. I’m probably going to get flamed by this, but I don’t care.
Let me as a question. What comes to your mind(s) when you see Christians in worship, say, on TV? I’m asking simply out of curiousity.
Hanlon // November 13, 2007 at 11:17 pm |
“Hanlon, I ask you. Did you read the Bible and figure these out, or did you go to some other source to find this out. No offense, but I find it hard to believe that you went through it yourself. I don’t see any problems with the things you’ve stated in the bible, they aren’t contradictions if you read them in context and understand what’s going on.”
Both. I’ve seen them elsewhere, and I’ve read them for myself. I’ve taken classes on Biblical interpretation (from a literary perspective), I have a hard copy and went through an audiobook version. Unfortunately I don’t have a 100% photographic memory so I tend to need to use reference sites to get the finer points.
I knew as soon as I said those your response was going to be “well those aren’t contradictions in context”. Bullshit. That’s the answer to matter what, your “inquiry” was dishonest from the get-go. No matter what I said, you’d claim I just didn’t understand and frankly I don’t feel like having a back-and-forth that essentially amounts to you going “nuh-uh!!” and throwing loaded questions at me.
“Let me as a question. What comes to your mind(s) when you see Christians in worship, say, on TV? I’m asking simply out of curiousity.”
Case in point. Let me answer with a question: what is it you expect me to say, and what about my answer interests you enough to need to know it? What information are you hoping to get?
“You know what, Christianity would be so easy if I could just show you what it feels like to become a Christian.”
For that matter, how do you think I came about my atheism? Now I’m honestly asking you. Do you think that I was born atheist? Raised in a godless household that mocked the faithful and rejected Christmas and Easter?
This is my biggest problem when talking to believers. They all seem to think I’ve never walked into a church or opened up a Bible. I was baptized in the Episcopal church as an infant and confirmed at 12, reading passages and doling out wine during the services until I was 17 when my doubts got the better of me.
You know Bishop Duncan, the Pittsburgh Bishop who’s at the forefront of the schism in the Episcopal Church over the gay bishop? That’s the guy who confirmed me. He’s got scary eyebrows and a ridiculously strong grip. Almost cracked my head like a coconut.
So get off your high horse and stop assuming you’re the only one here who’s skimmed the Gospels or sat in a church pew.
N // November 13, 2007 at 11:32 pm |
arg, your problem is that you are framing this issue as Christianity vs. evolution, or religion vs. evolution, or faith vs. evolution. Many many many Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindu, Buddhists, and virtually any other religion you can name accept evolution as an observed biological fact.
You ask me what I see when I think of Christians in worship. I generally think of people with faith celebrating that faith. Now if you were to talk about Pat Robertson, James Dobson, Bill Donahue, or the late Jerry Falwell, that’s a completely different story. But in general I think it’s great to have faith.
The problem is when you cannot resolve conflicts between faith and fact, and end up leaning toward faith. Do you know how many Christians can accept evolution while keeping their faith? Because even in the Bible, if you accept the slightest level of metaphor or literary license, it can be explained.
Why do the “days” in Genesis need to be 24-hour periods of time? Why does the Earth need to be “young,” when even palentologists and geologists can admit that the majority of the earth’s lifespan as a planet saw no life on it? Genesis says that God created the sun and the stars on the fourth day. However, days are measured in their very nature as a full 24-hour day-night cycle. Day and night didn’t even exist until the fourth “day.” Why, then, can’t the “days” described in Genesis be incredibly long periods of time, perhaps millions, billions, or trillions of years? If you take the Bible as even the slightest bit artistic and not utterly literal in its English translation, it’s incredibly easy to resolve evolution and the measured age of the earth.
Historically, the Bible was penned by many many people. Even if they were writing the words of God, those words have been edited, rearranged, and translated countless times over. Look of the Biblical Apocrypha and find out how much of your own Bible has been pared down and cut away from the original texts.
When your faith cannot stand against an observed fact, then your faith is brittle and weak. If you cannot resolve your belief in God with observed biology and geology, then you should look at your own faith, not at the observed science.
arg // November 14, 2007 at 7:20 am |
Okay Hanlon, like I stated earlier, I did not think/want to get into any kind of theological debate. You make it sound like you’re then first person to come up with these arguments. Really, I don’t want to get into it with you, because my prayers are that you come back to the church, and I definitely know that arguing points is going to help.
N, I’ve heard that numerous times as well (about the 24 hour yom arguement). Once again, I am not going to get into that with you, for it will not “prove” anything to you to make you accept Jesus.
Hanlon, now, as a Christian, I have a hard time defining my thoughts on eternal salvation, but I really question whether you were a Christian or not. Just because you got baptized doesn’t mean you’re a Christian. I understand that you grew up in the Church, but so did I, and that didn’t make me a Christian until much later in my life. Circumcision of the heart is much different than circumcision of the body, and a professing “Christian” is much different than one who is imbibed by the Holy Spirit.
God Bless you guys. I hope, if anything, you have a slightly different views of Christians and realize that we’re not all crazy gun toting gay hating abortion killing bush-praising righties. Now, i’m no liberal by definition, but I’m certainly no righty either.
JollyRoger // November 14, 2007 at 2:09 pm |
It isn’t the museum that is a joke so much as the Jesusistanis that all ran to it when it opened.
I live in an area where one can see billboards for it. And this area is wingtard, brother-hump-sister red.
sean s. // November 14, 2007 at 5:58 pm |
Bottom Line: this museum and creationists in general are quite serious. And as ARG shows, it’s not possible to have a productive conversation about this with them. Creationism and science are non-overlapping thought systems. Creationists speak the same language but the words all mean different things to them. I’ve tried for 30 years to find a creationist who actually understands how science works (much less how evolution works) and so far I’ve found none. Clearly ARG doesn’t understand either one. No surprise.
sean s.
arg // November 14, 2007 at 6:25 pm |
you know, that’s the same way i feel about you sean. funny, eh?
PaulM // November 14, 2007 at 9:38 pm |
No, arg, it ain’t funny at all. You remind me of the old adage, “Never try to teach a pig to sing – it wastes your time and it annoys the pig.”
Hanlon // November 15, 2007 at 1:05 am |
“Really, I don’t want to get into it with you, because my prayers are that you come back to the church, and I definitely know that arguing points is going to help.”
If I had a nickel for every time someone said they’d pray for me to find Jesus…
Aside from how much more fulfilling I find life without the burden of religion, I get an added benefit of never “finding Jesus”: it means that I get to point out how completely worthless those prayers were.
Ray // November 15, 2007 at 9:51 am |
Cheers for sharing these pictures.
It’s hard to believe those stories for someone like me here in europe. And above all, that they got so much money for such a ‘museum’.
Getting Close « blueollie // November 15, 2007 at 10:15 am |
[...] Speaking of Science and Religion: check out this report on the Creationist Museum (aka “moron magnet”) [...]
Merry // November 15, 2007 at 10:35 am |
I can’t tell you how much better I feel knowing that the Creation Museum is out there, and in the United States. I used to think that China had sewn up the market on unintentionally kitsch tourist attractions, but it is good to know that we are still in the running.
irishsof // November 15, 2007 at 11:51 am |
I only wish that I had been the person who came up with this great idea for fleecing the willfully ignorant. I’d be rolling in the dough.
Danny // November 15, 2007 at 12:33 pm |
Amazing. I live in Orlando, FL and I thought having a theme park called “The Holy Land Experience” was enough. I see it wasn’t.
Good article.
The Bad Bohemian // November 15, 2007 at 12:43 pm |
I have a terrible feeling, that like childhood obesity and constant re-runs of ‘Friends’ this is another idea that will eventually make it over the Atlantic to Britain. What have we done to deserve this? Oh yes, James Blunt. Sorry about that.
essaytch // November 15, 2007 at 2:59 pm |
Oh good God (yeah, that’s a capital “g”). Forgive them, they know not what they do….
Shawn // November 15, 2007 at 4:04 pm |
Wow, only in the States. I do also find it interesting and agree with Sean S,
“I’ve tried for 30 years to find a creationist who actually understands how science works (much less how evolution works) and so far I’ve found none.”
Born and raised Roman Catholic, it too took me until about 17 to realize the brainwashing and doctrines that are force fed to you. I’ve read the bible as a kid, once again as a teen, and just recently read it again. Every time I read it, it gets more and more ridiculous and contradictory.
I see it clearly from the middle – because, though I like Science, I wouldn’t even know where to start – the differences between Science and Religion. I know that Science and Religion have no place together, like Politics and Religion. Yet, I still side with Science because it appears (with evidence) to be more probable.
Jaime // November 15, 2007 at 5:04 pm |
“Someone who believes in evolution does not base their entire life around evolution anymore than someone who believes in heat transfer bases their entire life around thermodynamics.”
- You say this, but I have known many people who would prove you wrong. I used to be in the evolutionary biology program at Duke U, and the whole science dept—and even the social science dept—were full of religious evolutionists.
I think that is why creationists have some warrant to attack evolution on religious grounds, rather than just scientific. If you are honest, you’ll realize that “the theory” of evolution is not a theory and that scientists presuppose it to be true as much as creationists presuppose the Bible to be true.
“well it had to have happened like that because The Bible says so.”
-and I would add that evolutionists have their own version of this, “well it had to have happened like that because evolution said so.” Don’t patronize me now, because I was in a top notch academic institution for many years with people spinning evolutionary “just-so” stories all around me. Problem was, many of them contradicted each other as much as creationist “evidence.”
Jaime // November 15, 2007 at 5:05 pm |
Oh, and these are not STUDENTS I am referring to. They were PhD professors from Harvard and wherever. I even took classes by a Lamarckian evolutionists who was “undercover” less the Neo-Darwinists smelled him out.
Jason Berwick // November 15, 2007 at 8:22 pm |
This “museum” is both sad and terrifying. How can such a monument to ignorance be constructed with all that we now know, and seek to know, about the universe. I’m astounded.
podblack // November 15, 2007 at 8:24 pm |
Oh, these are very, very real. You might like to check out ‘Pigasus’ who went to check out the creation museum phenomenon and then went to a real museum to compare. Great to see your blog, btw!
http://www.mysteryinvestigators.com – look for the Pigasus vids.
Jason Berwick // November 15, 2007 at 8:24 pm |
‘Instead of collecting physical evidence and then displaying their findings, they take the conclusions and construct “evidence”.’
I like this quote. It sums up pretty much every religious endeavor. Well written.
Interesting....yet, not! // November 16, 2007 at 11:33 pm |
Umm…yeah. I could think of a million things better to do with my time than write back and forth with a ton of people trying to convert the world either way. Give up…recycle something, go green…walk a dog…but please, quit debating creation…it’s quite boring.
BrianR // November 17, 2007 at 3:58 am |
Yeah, unfortunately it is real…funded by Answers in Genesis…a pretty creepy outfit.
I’m done debating with those who do not accept the general tenets of evolution. They try and start the debate with semi-scientific inquiries and it quickly turns into a discussion of personal philosophy. I agree with a commenter above, it is quite boring.
I think it’s time for those who want to return to the days before the Age of Enlightenment to do so. You don’t accept evolution? Well, then you don’t get to enjoy the benefits of the entire field of genetics, for example. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Home school your kids if you don’t like real science. American’s math/science standing is going down the sh#$@er big time…having a component of the population that truly believes the earth was created 6,000 yrs ago is certainly not helping.
Enough is enough.
PaulM // November 19, 2007 at 2:09 pm |
I know this is a stale thread by now, but I just found this through another blog – take a tour through the Museum. Most depressing part: the crowds of sheeple. 43 pictures.
http://web.mit.edu/gjordan/www/creation/index.html
barakutei // November 26, 2007 at 4:41 pm |
This is one of those nightmares fartwall is having. These are delutions of unmidegated nonsense, with the hope that everyone buys into it. I wondered why there are no lions, tigers, and bears and white men only to name but a few, in or around Mt. Ararat (Turkey)the place where noah ,ark and crew landed. And, how did the animals from the rest of the world get to noah’s back yard and into to the ark. Seems to me someone is up to blowing smoke up everyone’s butt, with this one. The biggest smoke blowing contest is won by yours truly the cm. They still haven’t got it throught their thick heads that if a white man is out in the sun all day long that in a short time that white man is going to have dark skin. Why keep on pretending that white people are going to stay white no matter what. Its very simple you know, just stop all the damn lies and tell the truth for once. If you don’t know the truth, then keep your mouth shut in the hope that you might hear the truth spoken.
PaulM // November 29, 2007 at 12:19 am |
Are you saying that if I stay out in the sun long enough, I’ll become Black? My DNA will change? I’ll be far more likely to get sickle cell anemia? The shape of my hair shafts will change? I’ll get a larger nose, thicker lips, and a bigger dick?
That’s amazing. Here I thought I’d just get skin cancer from all the burning and peeling.
Someone alert the media.
JimC // December 16, 2007 at 2:04 am |
Challenging parts of evolution doesn’t bother me. No one can prove that there isn’t an element of “intelligent design” in the universe. The BIG PROBLEM is taking the HUGE leap and saying that Christianity and Creationsim is the truth. This is a religion made up by man like every other religion. If there is a higher power (which I believe) what makes us think we can comprehend it.
NC // January 11, 2008 at 12:16 am |
I cannot say either of the two conflicting theories exist, yet i find it hard to believe Creationism when, as the article said, the Christians find “evidence” of supposed events, with no physical proof and create supposed paradoxes within science. it should be duly noted that science is based on the quest for facts, while religion seeks to understand why life was meant to be. The two cannot mix, but the controversy on creationism and evolution says otherwise.
barakutei // February 7, 2008 at 7:49 pm |
PaulM I didn’t say you or any white person would become Black if they stayed out in the sun long enough and the other misunderstandings you are experiencing. What I said was that if a white person is out in the sun for a long period of time their skin would darken. As well as skin cancer and other complications, which I omitted to say and you said them. So no all those other benifits you mentioned are not part of the dark skin.
JoeBlo // April 1, 2008 at 1:59 pm |
“and I would add that evolutionists have their own version of this, “well it had to have happened like that because evolution said so.””
This is a good summary of why so many fundie religious people cannot grasp science. Evolution doesn’t “say” anything, the observable evidence supports the theory of evolution. It’s a big distinction. The theory of evolution could be chucked tomorrow and replaced by something else if someone found evidence that disproved evolution, but it’s pretty much the most well supported scientific theory of all time. The Bible, on the other hand, has been shown to be wrong over and over again for centuries as we discover new things about the natural world, but it’s still “God’s word” to the believers and inerrant.
hewkii9 // May 31, 2008 at 12:47 pm |
40 people over 2000 years, eh? Well, I’m pretty sure that over 40 people have said creationism is ridiculous over 5 years. Take that, God!
ADAM 2 // July 20, 2008 at 10:14 pm |
Hanlon’s razor is a joke it has to be
Hanlon // July 20, 2008 at 10:34 pm |
“Evolution doesn’t “say” anything, the observable evidence supports the theory of evolution. It’s a big distinction.”
Bingo. There has never, ever, in the history of science, been an instance where a phenomenon was retrofitted to evolution. Rather, it gets incorporated into it.
WileNot // September 27, 2008 at 3:54 pm |
most animals have 2 eyes (design?)
most humans have 2 eyes (design?)
most insects have 2 eyes (design?)
most have an = amount of limbs (design?)
love <–WHAT? where did that evolve from? (God?)
creation, intelegent design, God doesn’t role dice!
Did Chance design legs for fish or did the fish just realize that they needed to grow legs? -WileNot